The Belated Conversion of Former Republicans

While the increase of the number of Never Trumpers has been encouraging to watch, one thing that most of them are not quick to confess is that for far too long, most were apologists for toxic elements of the GOP base and GOP policies aimed at benefiting the few at the expense of the many as symbolized by both the GOP efforts to destroy the Affordable Health Care Act and the Trump/GOP tax cuts that did nothing other than provide a huge windfall to the very wealthy and large corporations while exploding the federal debt in the process.  And then there was the dishonesty and endless lies of the GOP that long preceded the rise of Trump.  The GOP has now become synonymous with lying and not just due to the endless lies emanating from the White House. The current impeachment inquiry has brought the dishonesty of the GOP to the forefront as laid out in a column in the Washington Post by a former Republican conservative who is among the Never Trump ranks.  Here are highlights:

When listening to President Trump and fellow Republicans throw around accusations against Democrats and the media or advance defenses for Trump’s impeachable conduct, there is a better than even chance they are misleading if not downright lying. In some cases, we discover the lies because other individuals are caught lying.

Roger Stone was convicted, among other things, of lying to Congress about his conversations with WikiLeaks’s Julian Assange. He falsely claimed: He had no emails, documents or texts relating to WikiLeaks; he never sought damaging information (i.e., emails) about Hillary Clinton; never contacted WikiLeaks through intermediaries; and never contacted the Trump campaign about WikiLeaks. The last lie — denying contacts with the Trump campaign — raises the question as to whether President Trump lied in responses to Robert S. Mueller II.

At the trial we learned about Stone’s numerous contacts with the campaign: Rick Gates, who served as Trump’s deputy campaign chairman, testified Tuesday that Stone began discussing Clinton leaks with the campaign in April 2016 and that from May onward Gates understood Stone to be the campaign’s intermediary with WikiLeaks. By July 2016, Gates testified, Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort said he was updating Trump and others regularly and directed Gates to keep following up with Stone. After Trump ended one phone call from Stone at the end of that month, Gates testified, the future president said to Gates that “more information would be coming.”

In his written answers, however, Trump claimed he had “no recollection” of conversations with Stone about WikiLeaks nor did he recall knowing Stone had discussed WikiLeaks’s email drops with the campaign. Perhaps Trump’s memory is addled; if not, it appears he lied to Mueller.

Likewise, in the Ukraine matter multiple witnesses gave testimony that suggests that Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland has been telling falsehoods under oath. Some he has remedied, . . . However, we now know from at least one other witness that Sondland’s denial that he spoke to the president or to the State Department was false. (He spoke to both.) One wonders if he’ll share a similar fate as Stone, the former Trump confidant who this week was found guilty on charges of lying to Congress, obstruction of justice and witness tampering. CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale has documented 45 Trump lies concerning Ukraine . . . . Other Trump lies include his denial that United States military aid was held up, his bizarre accusations that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) was the whistleblower’s source and his unfounded allegations that former vice president Joe Biden “stole” millions of dollars from foreign countries and pressured Ukraine to fire a prosecutor when Hunter Biden was still under investigation.

House Republicans continually traffic in lies — e.g., Ukraine interfered with our election, Joe Biden’s conduct pressuring removal of a delinquent prosecutor was illegal or corrupt, Trump was concerned about Ukraine’s corruption in general.

On procedure, they’ve lied about the depositions (routinely used in investigations), claiming they violate “due process” or amount to a “Soviet-style” star chamber.

At times, Republicans deliberately ignore evidence in front of their eyes. They seem to have settled on the theory that Trump never communicated to Zelensky that aid was tied to investigations of Biden, Burisma and Trump’s crackpot Ukraine interference conspiracy. Trump, however, raised these items in the phone call. . . . .
 Republicans’ lies are so numerous and obvious that one requires only a minimal amount of fact-checking to see that they lie because they have no truthful factual defenses nor valid constitutional argument. The facts are the facts: Trump conditioned aid to an ally in a war for its sovereignty on production of dirt to smear a political rival. He has refused to allow key witnesses to produce documents or to testify, thereby obstructing Congress. He has sought to intimidate and threaten witnesses including the whistleblower and Marie Yovanovitch, sending out the message you will be targeted and smeared if you provide evidence against him.

As for the Constitution, we know that “bribery,” enumerated as one of the grounds for impeachment in the parlance of the Framers, includes asking for or giving personal favors in exchange for political acts. That is precisely what occurred here. Obstruction and witness intimidation are obviously "high crimes."

House Republicans have become so invested in crackpot theories, bogus procedural complains and constitutional illiteracy that they will never recognize the president’s wrongdoing. They are as incapable of upholding their oath, which requires impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors or bribery, as he is. Both Trump and his House enablers are unfit to serve since personal and political considerations obliterate their ability to detect the truth and thereby to uphold their public obligations.

It remains an open question as to whether Senate Republicans are willing to ignore and distort reality so as to avoid voting to convict a president of their own party. Unfortunately, we find it highly unlikely that more than a few (if that many) would concede that Trump and the right-wing echo chamber that protects him have been spinning a web of lies for nearly three years.

The GOP web of lies goes back much further in time.  It is a shame that the Never Trumpers did not begin speaking out one to two decades ago.  Trump is the culmination of a pattern of lies that has stretched out for years. 

GOP Freedom Caucus’s Plan Could Hand the House to Democrats

One phenomenon I have noted over the years both during my time in the GOP and since is that it is nearly impossible to reason with ultra-conservatives and Christofascists.  Tellingly, both groups cannot seem to grasp that their views/beliefs are NOT mainstream and that outside of the bubble of Fox News and batshit crazy evangelical churches, the majority of Americans do not subscribe to their beliefs.  Indeed, I suspect the majority of Americans find them frightening if not repulsive.  Now the infamous GOP "Freedom Caucus" in the U.S. House of Representatives wants to withhold campaign funding from moderate Republicans ("moderate being a relative term) as punishment for supporting a discharge petition that might get immigration reform acceptable to all but the Trump base passed by Congress.  It's a case of cutting off one's nose to spite their face.  But, such is the irrationality of the far right.  A piece in New York Magazine looks at the idiocy - which I frankly hope prevails - roiling the GOP conference.  Here are highlights:

For years the ultra conservative House Freedom Caucus has been a thorn in the side of the GOP leadership. Now, in a twist, GOP moderates have banded together in an effort to force votes on immigration, including a bill that would provide a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers. The Freedom Caucus will not stand for a vote on so-called “amnesty,” so they’re calling for harsh punishments for moderates who dare to defy party leaders – though that could make it even likelier that Democrats win control of of the House in November.

The moderate Republicans have banded together with House Democrats to support a discharge petition, a rare maneuver that would allow them to circumvent Speaker Paul Ryan and force a vote on four immigration measures. This would include a measure that protects young undocumented immigrants in exchange for border security funding, without provisions from Representative Bob Goodlatte’s conservative immigration bill, like legal-immigration cuts and money for Trump’s border wall.

The Freedom Caucus already derailed passage of the Farm Bill last week over Ryan’s failure to meet their demand for a vote on the Goodlatte bill, and now the immigration issue is plunging the House GOP deeper into chaos. Though by definition, a discharge petition means members are acting without the leadership’s consent, conservatives are holding Ryan responsible for the moderates’ efforts, claiming he and other party leaders could be doing more to stop them.
 So the conservatives are suggesting that months before an election in which Republicans may lose control of the House by just a few seats, the leadership should punish their weakest members by withholding campaign money.

In general, threatening engaging more intra-party squabbling isn’t a smart strategy for the midterms. During a closed-door meeting on Tuesday morning, Ryan told members of the caucus that they need to remain united and act like they’re the majority party . . .

For now it’s unclear whether Republicans will be voting on one, two, or four immigration proposals in the coming weeks, and in the meantime they’re engaging in yet another form of self-destructive behavior: floating the idea of replacing Ryan as speaker prematurely.

But there’s little evidence that ousting Ryan is the solution to the caucus’s problems. While Ryan has endorsed McCarthy and he’s the frontrunner for the job, many aides and lawmakers told the Washington Post on Tuesday that there currently isn’t anyone who could easily win a race for speaker.

“If we have a speaker’s race, then it takes everyone’s eye off the ball of what’s most important, and that is keeping the majority,” said Representative Rodney Davis, chair of the centrist Republican Main Street Caucus. “It would be the most short-lived time in the speaker’s chair that anyone could have asked for.”

Let the insanity continue!

The Republican Assault on the Middle Class, Poor and Elderly

As Republicans were jubilant today over the House of Representative's passage of the American Health Care Act - Trumpcare or Ryancare in common parlance - several thoughts crossed my mind, not the least of which is the utter hypocrisy of Republicans lying through their teeth to claim that no one would lose coverage, that no one will have benefits cut, and that premium costs will fall. Obviously, these legislators are following the Hitler/Goebbels model: lie often enough and people will begin to believe the lie.  The reality is, however, that everyday experience of average Americans will reveal the depravity of House Republicans and the depth of the lie.   The dishonesty of House Republicans should come as no surprise for those who have followed the transformation of the GOP into a sectarian party controlled by greedy billionaires and evangelical/fundamentalist Christians. From decades in politics, no one, and I mean no one in modern day America lies more than the evangelical/fundamentalist Christian crowd.  By the same token, few groups in American society are so infused with greed and selfishness than the "godly folk."  A piece in the Washington Post looks at what the reality will be if today's hideous bill passes the U.S.  Senate (which is thankfully, a long shot).  Here are article highlights.  

I won’t mince words. The health-care bill that the House of Representatives passed this afternoon, in an incredibly narrow 217-to-213 vote, is not just wrong, or misguided, or problematic or foolish. It is an abomination. If there has been a piece of legislation in our lifetimes that boiled over with as much malice and indifference to human suffering, I can’t recall what it might have been. And every member of the House who voted for it must be held accountable.

There’s certainly a process critique one can make about this bill. We might focus on the fact that Republicans are rushing to pass it without having held a single hearing on it, without a score from the Congressional Budget Office that would tell us exactly what the effects would be, and before nearly anyone has had a chance to even look at the bill’s actual text — all this despite the fact that they are remaking one-sixth of the American economy and affecting all of our lives . . .

We might talk about how every major stakeholder group — the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, the AARP, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the American Heart Association, and on and on — all oppose the bill.

But the real problem is what’s in the bill itself. Here are some of the things it does:

• Takes health insurance away from at least 24 million Americans; that was the number the CBO estimated for a previous version of the bill, and the number for this one is probably higher.

• Revokes the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid, which provided no-cost health coverage to millions of low-income Americans.

• Turns Medicaid into a block grant, enabling states to kick otherwise-eligible people off their coverage and cut benefits if they so choose.

• Slashes Medicaid overall by $880 billion over 10 years.

• Removes the subsidies that the ACA provided to help middle-income people afford health insurance, replacing them with far more meager tax credits pegged not to people’s income but to their age. Poorer people would get less than they do now, while richer people would get more; even Bill Gates would get a tax credit.

• Allows insurers to charge dramatically higher premiums to older patients.

• Allows insurers to impose yearly and lifetime caps on coverage, which were outlawed by the ACA. This also, it was revealed today, may threaten the coverage of the majority of non-elderly Americans who get insurance through their employers.

• Allows states to seek waivers from the ACA’s requirement that insurance plans include essential benefits for things such as emergency services, hospitalization, mental health care, preventive care, maternity care, and substance abuse treatment.

• Provides hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts for families making over $250,000 a year.

• Produces higher deductibles for patients.

• Allows states to try to waive the ACA’s requirement that insurers must charge people the same rates regardless of their medical history. This effectively eviscerates the ban on denials for preexisting conditions, since insurers could charge you exorbitant premiums if you have a preexisting condition, effectively denying you coverage.

• Shunts those with preexisting conditions into high-risk pools, which are absolutely the worst way to cover those patients; experience with them on the state level proves that they wind up underfunded, charge enormous premiums, provide inadequate benefits and can’t cover the population they’re meant for. Multiple analyses have shown that the money the bill provides for high-risk pools is laughably inadequate, which will inevitably leave huge numbers of the most vulnerable Americans without the ability to get insurance.

• Brings back medical underwriting, meaning that just like in the bad old days, when you apply for insurance you’ll have to document every condition or ailment you’ve ever had.

It is no exaggeration to say that if it were to become law, this bill would kill significant numbers of Americans. . . . People whose serious conditions put them up against lifetime limits or render them unable to afford what’s on offer in the high-risk pools, and are suddenly unable to get treatment.

Those deaths are not abstractions, and those who vote to bring them about must be held to account. This can and should be a career-defining vote for every member of the House. No one who votes for something this vicious should be allowed to forget it — ever. They should be challenged about it at every town hall meeting, at every campaign debate, in every election and every day as the letters and phone calls from angry and betrayed constituents make clear the intensity of their revulsion at what their representatives have done.

 The Republican health-care bill is an act of monstrous cruelty. It should stain those who supported it to the end of their days.

Another worthy take down of the Republican abomination is at New York Magazine:

The heart of the bill is the same one that was polling at under 20 percent and failed two months ago: a near-trillion dollar tax cut for wealthy investors, financed by cuts to insurance subsidies for the poor and middle class. They have added a series of hazily defined changes: waivers for states to allow insurers to charge higher rates to people with preexisting conditions and to avoid covering essential health benefits, and a pitifully small amount of money to finance high-risk pools for sick patients.

The implications of these changes are vast. The Brookings Institution notes that if a single state eliminated the cap on lifetime benefits for a single employee, then employers in every state could actually follow suit, thus bringing back a horrid feature of the pre-Obamacare system, in which people who get hit with expensive treatment suddenly discover that their insurer will no longer pay for their care. This would affect not only those getting insurance through Medicaid or the state exchanges, but also through their job.

They are rushing through a chamber of Congress a bill reorganizing one-fifth of the economy, without even cursory attempts to gauge its impact. Its budgetary impact is as yet unknown. The same is true of its social impact, though the broad strokes are clear enough: Millions of Americans will lose access to medical care, and tens of thousands of them will die, and Congress is eager to hasten these results without knowing them more precisely. Their haste and secrecy are a way of distancing the House Republicans from the immorality of their actions.

GOP Senators May Yet Kill Obamacare Repeal

Word around Washington is that the fractious House Republicans may be able to cobble together a new bill to "repeal and replace" Obamacare.  Like its predecessor, this concoction would likely throw millions off of health insurance and allow premiums to soar for many even as disingenuous House members bloviate (read lie) about reducing costs, etc., etc.  Frankly, only a total fool would believe the claims since the number one goal in the House is a massive tax cut for the wealthy.  That said, anything that does manage to pass the House - likely on a pure party line vote - still faces sever obstacles in the Senate and not just from Democrats.  As a piece in Politico reports, a number of Republican Senators may be the bill's biggest obstacle.  Here are article highlights:

The House may finally be on its way to scrapping Obamacare, but don’t expect the Senate to go along: Any plan sent over will undergo major surgery — and survival is far from assured.

The hurdles in the upper chamber were on vivid display Wednesday as House Republicans celebrated their breakthrough on the stalled repeal effort. The compromise cut with House Freedom Caucus members won over the right flank, but the changes will almost surely make it harder to pick up votes in the more moderate-minded Senate.

“The Freedom Caucus has done a good job of trying to make the bill less bad,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of the lead Senate agitators against the House health care push, said Wednesday. “For me, it’s a big stumbling block still that there’s taxpayer money that’s being given to insurance companies, and I am just not in favor of taxpayer money going to insurance companies.”

Phil Novack, a spokesman for Sen. Ted Cruz , also indicated that the conservative Texas firebrand isn't sold, saying “significant work remains” in the Senate, “specifically to address Obamacare’s insurance mandates and enact major patient-centered reforms that will further reduce the cost of health care.”

Sources say it may take more than a month for any House health care bill to run through the traps in the Senate, including internal party discussions and an analysis of how the measure would affect the deficit and insurance rolls. No committee hearings are planned because Republicans don’t want to give Democrats a public forum to bash an effort they are not involved in. And similar to the Senate's dim view of the House's proposal, the lower chamber may not ultimately be able to pass whatever the Senate is able to produce on Obamacare.

Weeks after the spectacular collapse of Obamacare repeal efforts last month, MacArthur and Meadows struck a deal with new language that would allow states to opt out of several key Obamacare provisions, such as its ban on charging sick people higher premiums and the so-called essential health benefits mandate that requires insurers to provide a set of minimum benefits.

The new language was enough to earn the formal endorsement of the Freedom Caucus, but House moderates who were opposed to the previous plan remain wary of backing a proposal that could cause constituents with pre-existing conditions to lose affordable health care coverage. In fact, the new plan may be having the reverse effect on some centrists: Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.) had supported the initial Obamacare replacement but now says he’s a “maybe.”

Influential Senate Republicans also raised doubts about whether the new House proposal is workable. . . . Senators are likely to make Medicaid cuts less severe, deliver more money for opioid funding, make tax credits for the middle class more generous and rework the House’s waivers from Obamacare’s requirements.

In interviews with senators across a broad ideological range, there was growing irritation with attempts to ram complicated legislative language through the House and expect the Senate to clean it up. Some GOP senators suggested that a bipartisan bill may be the only way to overhaul the health care system in a lasting manner.

“I don’t know if this bill is better … the worst thing we can do is replace it with a Republican-only alternative that doesn’t drive down costs, that doesn’t improve access to care,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). 

Republicans in the House are desperate to pass a bill.  The fact that it would harm many seems to be irrelevant as long as they can say they passed something - and, of course, delivered a big tax cut to the most wealthy.

House Republicans Vote to Hobble Independent Ethics Office

So it begins.  Donald Trump. a/k/a Der Fuhrer has not even yet been sworn into office and the reign of corruption begins.  House Republicans, with no notice or debate, voted yesterday to significantly curtail the power of an independent ethics office that oversees the conduct of Members of the House of Representatives and House congressional officials.  One can only assume the move was taken in the wake of Der Fuhrer's refusal to disengage himself from his business empire and not use the office of the presidency to further enrich himself.  Obviously, this does not bode well for the country and the typical American voter and signals that things will likely only get worse.  A piece in the New York Times looks at the disturbing development.  Here are story highlights:  

House Republicans, defying their top leaders, voted Monday to significantly curtail the power of an independent ethics office set up in 2008 in the aftermath of corruption scandals that sent three members of Congress to jail.

The move to weaken the Office of Congressional Ethics was not public until late Monday, when Representative Robert Goodlatte, Republican of Virginia and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, announced that the House Republican Conference had approved the change with no advance public notice or debate.

In its place, a new Office of Congressional Complaint Review would be set up within the House Ethics Committee, which before the creation of the Office of Congressional Ethics had been accused of ignoring credible allegations of wrongdoing by lawmakers.

The full House is scheduled to vote Tuesday on the rules, which will last for two years, until the next congressional elections.

The surprising vote came on the eve of the start of a new session of Congress, with emboldened Republicans ready to push an ambitious agenda on everything from health care to infrastructure, issues that will be the subject of intense lobbying from corporate interests. The move by Republicans would take away both power and independence from an investigative body, and give lawmakers more control over internal inquiries.

Mr. Goodlatte defended the action in a statement issued Monday evening, saying it would strengthen ethics oversight in the House while also giving lawmakers better protections against what some members have called overzealous efforts by the Office of Congressional Ethics.
 

Let's be clear.  Goodlatte is a liar and obviously id looking to enrich himself off of lobbyist bribes.  Now corruption is a GOP "family value."  The cesspool gets worse and worse.  

GOP Does Clinton Favor with FBI Director Comey Hearings

One would thing that House Republicans would have learned a lesson from the Benghazi hearings where they grilled Hillary Clinton for 11 hours and allowed Clinton to leave as the victory.  Such lessons happen routinely in the real world, but nowadays, Republicans do not live in the real world. Instead, conspiracy theories run amok and, thanks to Fox News, a/k/a Faux News, and other defacto Republican news outlets, help members of the GOP to live in a fantasy world that is detached from objective reality.  Today's interrogation of FBI Director James Comey was a case in point where Republican blindness and Clinton derangement syndrome drove House Republicans to hand a favor to Hillary Clinton.   While some of Comey's remarks on Tuesday were outwardly damaging to Clinton, today's hearing circus allowed Comey to walk back some of what were at first glance gifts to the GOP.  MSNBC looks at the House Republican's self-inflicted wounds.  Here are highlights:

GOP lawmakers had clearly identified protagonists and antagonists. Just as importantly, they’d convinced much of the media that their tale was as important as it was riveting. Today, however, Republicans lost the plot. On Tuesday, FBI Director James Comey announced that while Hillary Clinton’s email server protocols were careless, no sane prosecutor would find her actions worthy of an indictment. House Republicans, who were counting on an indictment to improve the GOP’s election chances, were apoplectic and hastily threw together a hearing, forcing Comey to go to Capitol Hill to explain himself. What Republicans didn’t realize is the degree to which they were doing Clinton and Democrats a favor. NBC News reported on the proceedings:

FBI director James Comey stuck to his guns Thursday and defended his decision not to charge Hillary Clinton with a crime for her use of a private email server while serving as secretary of state. Summoned to appear before the Republican-led House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Comey insisted again that Clinton “did not break the law” and that there was not enough evidence to charge her with a crime. “That’s just the way it is,” Comey said.

I honestly have no idea what Republicans thought they were going to achieve with this spectacle. Did GOP lawmakers expect Comey to declare, “Now that you’ve yelled at me for a few hours, I’ve changed my mind and now support criminal charges against Clinton”? Before the hearing Republicans had a series of fairly specific talking points: Clinton lied to the FBI; she created a national security threat; she plays by a different set of rules than everyone else. But instead of simply repeating those talking points, GOP lawmakers invited the FBI director – a lifelong Republican, whom GOP officials have repeatedly praised for his honesty – to testify about how wrong the party’s arguments are. “We have no basis to believe she lied to the FBI,” Comey said. Asked about Clinton benefiting from a different set of rules, he responded, “It’s not true.” Asked about classified emails, Comey said there were only three messages – each of which were not properly marked classified when she received them. In other words, congressional Republicans had the bright idea of holding a hearing with a credible witness who was perfectly happy to explain to them how wrong they are. Making matters worse, GOP lawmakers forgot who the villains and heroes were supposed to be in their story. Republicans were supposed to make Clinton the scoundrel of this narrative, but today, they decided instead to go after the director of the FBI – because he had the audacity to say a Democrat didn’t commit a crime.

Now the story is Comey vs. Republicans – GOP lawmakers had some baseless allegations and reckless conspiracy theories, some of which targeted Comey directly, and they asked the FBI director to give testimony knocking down each of their bad arguments. For their part, Democrats suddenly found themselves keeping up with Republican attempts to change the subject – talking about Clinton’s emails is suddenly less important than talking about Comey’s credibility and reliability. When congressional Republicans take stock this evening and reflect on their failed gambit, one wonders whether they’ll appreciate the fact that this Comey hearing was a bad plan, executed poorly. The last time Democrats were this pleased with GOP hearing, it was Clinton’s 11-hour Benghazi Committee testimony – in which Republicans made fools of themselves and their conspiracy theories, and Clinton turned her entire presidential campaign around. It helps sometimes to be blessed with incompetent enemies.

House GOP Hear Bill Legalizing Anti-LGBT Discrimination One Month After Pulse Massacre

If my former Republican colleagues wonder why I hold the GOP in such contempt nowadays, they need look no farther than the GOP members of the House of Representatives, including the always despicable and hypocrisy filled Paul Ryan, who plan to hold a hearing for the passage of the deliberately falsely named "First Amendment Defense Act" which would give Christofascists the right to discriminate against LGBT citizens - and by extension others they dislike.  To make matters even more foul, the hearing will occur on the one month anniversary of the Pulse massacre in Orlando, a massacre motivated by anti-gay hatred.  Hatred that the House Republicans wish to legitimize and legalize.  Every one of the 170 sponsors in the House is a Republican excerpt for one, Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL).  Here are excerpts from the Washington Blade:

A U.S. House committee has scheduled a hearing on July 12 for federal “religious freedom” legislation seen to enable anti-LGBT discrimination, the Washington Blade has learned.

The House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform is set to hold a hearing on the First Amendment Defense Act amid pressure from anti-LGBT advocates, including the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage, to move forward with the legislation.

Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), who’s gay and a co-chair of the LGBT Equality Caucus, denounced the committee’s decision to hold a hearing in a statement as “nothing more than an election-year stunt to rally conservatives at the expense of LGBT Americans.”

“In most states, you can get married on Saturday, post photos of your wedding to Facebook on Sunday and then get fired or kicked out of your apartment on Monday just because you’re gay,” Cicilline added. “FADA exacerbates this injustice by allowing religion to be used as a blanket excuse for denying LGBT people access to employment, housing, mental health care, emergency shelters and other essential services. This is wrong. Fairness and equality are core American values.”

Cicilline called on Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), a supporter of the legislation and chair of the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform, to cancel the hearing.

If enacted - and not vetoed by President Obama - the so-called First Amendment Defense Act would bar the federal government from taking action against individuals or companies that discriminate against LGBT Americans on the basis of “religious belief or moral conviction.”  It would literally make Christofascists above the laws that govern the rest of America. There is no limit to the lengths that today's GOP will go to use hatred and bigotry to rally hate-filled and bigoted voters among the "godly folk."

Some Republicans "Leave the Dark Side"; Meanwhile House Republicans Block LGBT Protections

Anti-LGBT Republican, Paul Ryan

Remember all of the feigned messages of condolences from assorted Republicans in the wake of the Orlando massacre of gays on Sunday morning.  While few allowed the words' "gay " or "LGBT" to cross their lips, they claimed to have the victims and their families in their thoughts and prayers. Today we saw just how insincere those words to the wounded and the families of those killed really were as Republicans in the House of Representatives blocked LGBT non-discrimination protections. These individuals truly are heinous.  Here are excerpts from The Advocate on this effort to kick the LGBT community yet again as it morns its dead:

House Republicans blocked a vote on LGBT nondiscrimination protections just days after the deadliest shooting in mass history claimed the lives of 49 people at Orlando’s Pulse nightclub.

Following the horrific attack on the Florida gay bar, Democratic congressman Sean Maloney reintroduced an amendment to a defense spending bill that would prohibit the federal government from contracting with companies that discriminate against LGBT workers. Only 18 states have laws on the books that ban discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation, and Maloney believes that this legislation would show the government’s support for the LGBT community at a crucial moment.

This is now the third time that Maloney’s LGBT amendment has been stonewalled by [Republicans in]Congress. On May 19, the GOP killed the legislation after it already had the votes to pass. In a last-minute maneuver, House Republicans coerced colleagues into switching their votes in order to ensure its failure. As the bill was voted down, Democrats chanted, “Shame! Shame! Shame!” on the House floor.

The legislation was reintroduced the following day. While the previous version was attached to a Veterans Affairs appropriations bill, this one was tied to a bill on energy and water spending. It again died.

Former GOP Senator Larry Pressler

Since I left the GOP many years ago, I hate to say it, but the party has become the personification of evil, especially in terms of pushing the hate and bigotry agenda of the Christofascists.   Thankfully, some in the GOP seem to be belatedly waking up.   One is former GOP U. S, Senator, Larry Pressler, a Mormon, who is endorsing Hillary Clinton as reported by Daily Kos:

After a weekend that forced us to confront the worst in humanity.  After a night that brought us to grips with a personal crisis in our own DKos family.  We see that one good man can stand up against the “Dark forces” that he sees griping the Senate in which he served for 18 years.  Larry Pressler is a Mormon sunday school teacher who tried to buck the insanity in his party a few years ago as a third party alternative but this is harsh reality speaking (via TheHIll.com):

“We need to go the route of more gun control as a result of Orlando and all the other shootings that have occurred,” Pressler said. “But it’s almost as though Republicans are saying gun control shouldn’t be part of the conversation at all."

But gun control isn’t the only reason why Pressler is ready to join “Republicans for Clinton” — he’s also concerned about Trump’s rhetoric on Muslims.

“This election is starting to sound like the German elections in [the late 1920s],” Pressler said. “This is a very dangerous national conversation we’re slipping into.”

“I can’t believe I’m endorsing Hillary Clinton for president, but I am,” said Pressler, who spoke with The Hill on Monday after endorsing Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, in a statement issued over the weekend.
“
“If someone had told me 10 years ago I would do this, I wouldn’t have believed them."

Pressler, a moderate Republican who served three terms in the Senate before losing his seat to Democrat Tim Johnson in 1997, said he believes voting for Clinton is the “responsible thing to do.”

Utah Lt. Governor Spencer Cox

Perhaps more moving and more focused on the LGBT community are the remarks - and apology - of GOP Lt. Governor of Utah, Spencer Cox who spoke at a vigil for the victims of the Orlando massacre.  KLS.com has the transcript of his full remarks (read the entire thing).  Here are highlights:

SALT LAKE CITY — Utah Lt. Governor Spencer Cox addressed a vigil held Monday night to honor the victims and survivors of the mass shooting in Orlando. Here is a transcript of his remarks:
---
Ladies and Gentlemen,

Thank you for being here tonight on this very solemn and somber occasion. I begin with an admission and an apology. First, I recognize fully that I am a balding, youngish, middle-aged straight, white, male, Republican, politician... with all of the expectations and privileges that come with those labels. I am probably not who you expected to hear from today.

I’m here because, yesterday morning, 49 Americans were brutally murdered. And it made me sad. And it made me angry. And it made me confused. I’m here because those 49 people were gay. I’m here because it shouldn’t matter. But I’m here because it does. I am not here to tell you that I know exactly what you are going through. I am not here to tell you that I feel your pain. I don’t pretend to know the depths of what you are feeling right now. But I do know what it feels like to be scared. And I do know what it feels like to be sad. And I do know what it feels like to be rejected. And, more importantly, I know what it feels like to be loved.

I grew up in a small town and went to a small rural high school. There were some kids in my class that were different. Sometimes I wasn’t kind to them. I didn’t know it at the time, but I know now that they were gay. I will forever regret not treating them with the kindness, dignity and respect — the love — that they deserved. For that, I sincerely and humbly apologize.

We are here because 49 beautiful, amazing people are gone. These are not just statistics. These were individuals. These are human beings. They each have a story. They each had dreams, goals, talents, friends, family. They are you and they are me. And one night they went out to relax, to laugh, to connect, to forget, to remember. And in a few minutes of chaos and terror, they were gone.

I believe that we can all agree we have come a long way as a society when it comes to our acceptance and understanding of the LGBTQ community (did I get that right?). However, there has been something about this tragedy that has very much troubled me. I believe that there is a question, two questions actually, that each of us needs to ask ourselves in our heart of hearts. And I am speaking now to the straight community. How did you feel when you heard that 49 people had been gunned down by a self-proclaimed terrorist? That’s the easy question. Here is the hard one: Did that feeling change when you found out the shooting was at a gay bar at 2 a.m. in the morning? If that feeling changed, then we are doing something wrong.

So now we find ourselves at a crossroads. A crossroads of hate and terror. How do we respond? How do you respond? Do we lash out with anger, hate and mistrust. Or do we, as Lincoln begged, appeal to the “better angels of our nature?”

I truly believe that this is the defining issue of our generation. Can we be brave? Can we be strong? Can we be kind and, perhaps, even happy, in the face of atrocious acts of hate and terrorism? Do we find a way to unite? Or do these atrocities further corrode and divide our torn nation? Can we, the citizens of the great state of Utah, lead the nation with love in the face of adversity? Can WE become a greatest generation?

On behalf of the 3 million people of the state of Utah, We Are Orlando. We love you. And I love you.

.

House Republicans Again Confirm Their Anti-LGBT Animus

Republican controlled state legislatures have launched an aggressive anti-LGBT jihad, enacting so-called "religious liberty" laws and bathroom bills aimed at transgender Americans.  Now, the Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives have made clear their anti-LGBT animus by blocking an amendment to an appropriations bill that would have protected LGBT individuals from employment discrimination by federal contractors.  The goal: to allow blatant anti-LGBT discrimination. The GOP will seemingly go to any and all lengths to please its Christofascist overlords and make life Hell for LGBT Americans.  Politico looks at the circus that occurred as the Republicans made their animus clear.  Here are excerpts:

The House erupted in chaos Thursday morning with Democrats crying foul after Republicans hastily persuaded a few of their own to switch their votes and narrowly block an amendment intended to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people from discrimination.

It was an unruly scene on the floor with Democrats chanting, "Shame!" after GOP leaders barely muscled up the votes to reject, 212-213, an amendment by Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.) that would have effectively barred federal contractors from getting government work if they discriminate against the LGBT community.

At one point, a monitor in the House gallery showed there were 217 votes supporting the legislation, eliciting cheers of joy from Democrats who thought the measure might actually pass. But over the course of about 10 minutes, those votes suddenly dropped one by one to 212 — and the amendment failed.

A number of lawmakers from western states, who originally voted yes, changed their votes. According to a list tweeted out an hour after the vote by House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer’s (D-Md.) office, they included: California Reps. Darrell Issa, David Valadao, Jeff Denham, Mimi Walters, and Rep. Greg Walden of Oregon, Rep. David Yong of Iowa and Rep. Bruce Poliquin of Maine.

Republicans are saying privately that if the amendment had passed, it would have killed the appropriations bill because Republicans would no longer vote for it.  "Our veterans and troops were prioritized over a political messaging amendment that could have jeopardized the final passage of the appropriations bill," said Speaker Paul Ryan's spokeswoman AshLee Strong in a statement.

The acrimony undermined a success for Ryan earlier that day regarding his commitment to regular order. Just moments before the LGBT vote, he’d shepherded the first House vote to bar the Confederate flag from flying in mass graves at federal cemeteries.
Almost every Democrat was on his or her feet shouting and eventually they broke out in a chant, pointing their fingers at the other side of the chamber where the Republicans sit: “Shame! Shame! Shame!”

The GOP’s Sympathy for Sedition

When Republican politicians constantly attack the government - and other citizens - to pander to ugly elements in their party base, they are setting the stage for and building a mindset that accepts armed revolt against the government and the larger society.  This is especially true when portions of that base are pathological in their hatred towards others and view themselves literally above the law.  A column in the Washington Post looks at how today's Republican Party encourages sedition, a/k/a treason.  Note how GOP House members try to conflate armed bands with "peaceful civil disobedience."  It is laughable or insane, take your pick. Here are excerpts:

Republican lawmakers began the new year in Washington with new ideas about how to undermine the government in which they serve. 

On Wednesday, the first legislative day of the year, House conservatives gathered with reporters for their monthly “Conversations with Conservatives.” When the questioning turned to the armed rebellion in Oregon against the authority of the federal government, these representatives of the United States stood with the rebels. 

No, Congressman. Civil disobedience is when people break laws they think unjust and then peacefully face the legal consequences. The takeover of a federal wildlife facility in Oregon by armed men is sedition.

Yet not one of the 10 or so Republican House members on the panel criticized the takeover, and one, Rep. Steve Pearce (N.M.), announced his refusal to pass judgment.

It was an inauspicious start to this election year and to the second session of the 114th Congress. The Republican majority began the year not by governing but with an ostentatious show of its hostility toward government.

The House’s first substantive piece of business for the new year: another attempt to repeal Obamacare (the 62nd, by the Democrats’ tally) coupled with another stab at cutting off Planned Parenthood, one of a dozen such efforts recently to scale back abortion rights and women’s health care.

[T]here was, purely as a matter of doggedness, something impressive about the New Year’s Obamacare vote. North Korea is testing nukes, Saudi Arabia and Iran are plunging the Middle East deeper into conflict — but congressional Republicans will not be distracted from their agenda.  

[I]t’s hard to govern when your caucus is so hostile to government that it has sympathy for seditionists. Asked about the Oregon situation, Ryan deferred to Rep. Greg Walden, a member of GOP leadership who represents the area — and, as The Post’s Mike DeBonis noted, Ryan nodded agreement as Walden spoke. Walden made clear that “an armed takeover is not the way to go about it,” but he had sympathy for the rebels.  . . . . lawmakers sworn to uphold the Constitution applaud those who take up arms against the government.

Paul Ryan: I'll Be Speaker But Only If the Neanderthals Supports Me

I have no love for Paul "Reverse Robin Hood" Ryan.  That said, the man isn't stupid (even if he is otherwise horrible) since he has told the House Republicans that he will throw his hat into the ring for the position of Speaker of the House only if all of the elements of the Republican conference support him.  Ryan has no desire to step into the nightmare that drove John Boehner into resigning.  The big question, therefore, is whether or not the lunatic Christofascist/Tea Party elements of the House GOP will swear fealty to Ryan.  Ryan has given them until Friday to decide.  Politico looks at the ongoing circus within the Republican Party.  Here are excerpts:

Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, who for years has resisted a move into House Republican leadership, said Tuesday night he would serve as House speaker if he is the party's "unity candidate."

Ryan, the Ways and Means Committee chairman, wants to know by Friday if the 247 members of the House Republican Conference support him. If not, he is "happy" to continue as chairman of the powerful tax-writing panel, the 45-year-old lawmaker said.

The Wisconsin Republican laid out a series of "requests" to his GOP colleagues on Tuesday night, including a demand that the major factions within the Republican Conference endorse him before he agrees to seek the speakership. Ryan is clearly trying to shift the onus of his decision onto the House Freedom Caucus, a group of hardline conservatives that repeatedly sought to undermine Speaker John Boehner.

Ryan wants the group to refrain from any attempts to remove him from the speaker's chair if he makes a decision they disagree with, though it's not at all clear Freedom Caucus will agree.

"I have left this decision in their hands, and should they agree with these requests, then I am happy and I am willing to get to work."

Ryan added: "This is not a job I ever wanted or I ever sought. I am in the job I've always wanted here in the Congress. I came to the conclusion that this is a very dire moment, not just for Congress, not just for the Republican Party, but for our country. I think our country is in desperate need of leadership."

Ryan described himself as "reluctant" to be speaker and said there were some parts of the job he dreaded. But he said would take on the post if the three major groups inside the GOP conference — the Republican Study Committee, the moderate Tuesday Group, and the Freedom Caucus — all endorse him by Friday.

Ryan also wants Republicans to alter the procedure for "vacating the chair," which is essentially a referendum to remove the speaker from office. Conservatives threatened to force such a vote against Boehner earlier this summer, and Ryan believes it's destructive. 

The Wisconsin Republican is calling on the next speaker to be more visionary. Ryan agreed with Freedom Caucus members and a large bloc of the GOP in supporting changes to rules and procedures to empower rank-and-file members. But he said those decisions must be made together.

As Think Progress notes, the Neanderthals spittle flecked "real Americans" in the GOP are not reacting well to Ryan's demands:

How the Freedom Caucus, and the right-wing, is reacting to Paul Ryan’s demands

Not well.   Many members of the Freedom Caucus are already publicly rejecting Paul Ryan and his demands.

There are 40 members of the Freedom Caucus so the ultimate outcome is still in doubt. They will be under severe pressure from the Republican establishment to reverse course and support Ryan. But the early signs for Ryan are not positive.